Past Modules

Polycentricism seems to be the dominant pattern in metropolitan regions such as the Randstad in the Netherlands or the Rhine-Ruhr area in Germany. Compared to monocentric metropolitan regions such as the Greater Munich area or Hamburg, polycentric regions seem to have a disadvantage in attracting a high-skilled workforce because these regions (and the cities in these regions) lack transparency and a clear profile.

Nevertheless, polycentric regions seek to compete with the monocentric regions in Europe. In some polycentric metropolitan areas, several medium-sized cities adopt a cooperative strategy to balance this disadvantage and join forces. However, cities in metropolitan areas often cooperate and compete at the same time and this constitutes a problem for collaborative strategies.

Therefore, unlike monocentric city regions, (e.g. Munich, Paris or London) where a dominant, centrally-based alpha-metropolis is in a position to set the agenda, polycentric regions face greater challenges in creating a regional governance system, making them latently unstable and difficult to manage. This seems to confirm the well-known saying: “Good fences make good neighbors!”

On the other hand, polycentric metropolitan regions may have something to offer. The absence of a dominant core city results in a more balanced settlement structure with wide green spaces, a variety of options for leisure activities, and places to live. In more theoretical terms, this can be described as functional differentiation that may result in synergies for metropolitan development. Still, metropolitan regions not only provide a visibility-bonus for the smaller municipalities, but are also assumed to offer advantages regarding the cost-benefit ratios of agglomeration effects. The critical point to acknowledge is to what extent the region is able to organize its resources in a complementary way in order to ensure emergent effects. But can the virtues of polycentric metropolitan areas be realized? Does summing up small cities really make a metropolis?

The Rhine-Ruhr Region is an exemplary case to address these questions. It is one of the largest agglomerations in Europe, but displays a polycentric character without a clear dominant center and envelops many interior borders that divide the different cities. Political-administrative fragmentation hampers better coordination of planning and transport policies. The region is divided between the more prosperous south-west (Düsseldorf, Cologne) and the Ruhr area in the north-east that continues to struggle with the legacy of mining and steel production.

Another typical feature of this agglomeration is the great number of internal borders that separate settlement areas. These areas are further segregated by various land uses: industrial properties, areas used for storage and logistics, corridors and lines for energy supply and one of the regional green belts crossing the Ruhr agglomeration (what Christa Reicher calls “Ruhrbanism”).

A unique quality of the Ruhr region is the co-location of settlement areas, green spaces, rivers and waterways. Green spaces extend into the urban landscape everywhere within the region so that it is always possible to easily reach a nearby open park or woodland.

All throughout the region you can find meadows and forests, fields and gardens, which are used by the residents and noticeably shape the urban landscape. Including these urban greenspaces with the substantial number of public parks helps to illustrate the vast proportion of open space within the Ruhr region. In fact, many scholars consider the Ruhr region as a laboratory for the transformation of metropolitan areas.

The Rhine-Ruhr Module was hosted by the Faculty of Spatial Planning at the Technical University of Dortmund. Lecturers from academia and private and public organizations as well as practitioners discussed the challenges and solutions relating to the governance of polycentric metropolitan areas. Issues to be adressed include: institutional design of metropolitan governance, democratic quality of metropolitan governance, green infrastructure, mobility and transport and energy laboratories.

Detroit, like many other industrial cities in the United States, has been struggling with economic decline over the past few decades. But why is this decline happening? How can it be prevented from happening in other cities? How can these cities solve the severe financial problems they face?

Cities need viable sources of wealth generation in order to continue delivering a high quality of services to their citizens. Industrialization was a major source of wealth generation, and many cities in the world have been developed around, or experienced a major growth period by hosting large industrial/manufacturing firms.

Nowadays, however, globalization and rapid urbanization are two of the main factors driving the de-industrialization of many cities around the globe. Globalization has led to the relocation of many manufacturing firms, previously anchored in metropolitan areas in Western countries, towards Asia and Latin America, in order to save costs. On the other hand, rapid urbanization has resulted in increasing demands for transport, energy, construction, clean water, and other basic urban services. This increasing demand for urban services can increase the level of pollution in cities as well as the demand for land and resources presently being consumed by industrial firms. Increasing pollution and competing demands for land (as well as water and energy) in cities can sometimes serve to push industrial firms outside the boundaries of large metropolitan areas.

Globalization and urbanization are two strong trends that seem unlikely to slow down in the near future. Therefore, it seems plausible to expect the de-industrialization of urban areas to continue. On the other hand, the demands for financing to improve the quality of services for citizens and to increase the attractiveness of the city for investors are also rising. The resulting question is how can these two seemingly dichotomous trends – an increasing demand for economic activities and a push for industrial activity to be relocated outside metropolitan areas – be reconciled in 21st century cities?

A decline in economic activities in a metropolitan area can make the area an unattractive place for working, living, and investing. This could cause the city’s population to decline, urban infrastructures to become underutilized, and could result in less money being generated for the maintenance of existing infrastructures. Poor infrastructure and a lack of investment can continue to amplify these effects, making the place even more unappealing; this negative cycle can continue until the city experiences a massive drop in population or, in many cases, goes bankrupt and becomes heavily dependent on external financial resources in order to persist.

The 11-day IGLUS Training Module in Detroit/East Lansing/Chicago held April 2015 was one of seven modules in the IGLUS Global Training Series, organized by EPFL, Switzerland, and in collaboration with Michigan State University. The aim of this 11-day training program is to understand how cities could deal with the economic challenges they are face, with a special focus on the implications of governance of large urban infrastructures. Join us now by clicking here!

Why Detroit/Chicago?

American cities were among the first to face the challenges associated with de-industrialization, with Detroit being a particularly well-known case. Experts from around the world gathered in Detroit, a city that has suffered from economic challenges and is still struggling to settle its bankruptcy case, and Chicago, a city that could overcome the hard times associated with economic transition.

In Detroit and Chicago, we discussed the best practices for innovative governance of economic challenges in large urban systems. Our participants had the opportunity to learn more about how American cities function, what their current challenges are, and what strategies are available to overcome these challenges.

Covered topics

In the Detroit/Chicage training modules experts from the World Bank, UN- Habitat, EPFL, Michigan State University, Veolia, Transdev, Schneider Electric, and well- known practitioners working with American cities discussed the economic considerations associated with the governance of urban infrastructure systems and their respective challenges. More precisely, the following topics were covered:

Urban economics and metropolitan finance mechanisms

Economics of infrastructure

Pricing and regulation of public utilities

Brownfield reclamation in urban areas

Urban leadership and community engagement

Management of mega-projects in cities

Urban resilience

IGLUS-Chicago/Detroit Module provided multiple benefits to its participants both from a theoretical point of view and with practice-oriented insights in order to gain the knowledge necessary to resolve the various economic challenges that face the governance of large urban systems. For more information, please email iglus@epfl.ch.

Citizens’ memories and habits are shaped by their interactions with the living environment, (i.e., their city). Cities with long histories and strong identities thus evoke strong memories and meanings for their citizens. However, not all of these city-citizen ties can be preserved indefinitely. In age of urbanization, characterized by densely populated neighbourhoods, scarce resources, new technological possibilities and environmental challenges, cities are no longer able to function in their conventional ways.

Urban renewal projects are ultimately aimed at improving the quality of life in cities, and the urban renewal process inevitably alters the way that cities (sometimes with thousands ofyears of history) function, and will inevitably interfere with the habits and memories of citizens. Urban renewal projects are typical examples of when the necessity for re-organizing the city’s infrastructure and the unwillingness of the habitants to change conflict. This can result, and has repeatedly resulted, in the emergence of opposition from social groups towards certain projects, in the social exclusion of vulnerable groups after the implementation of a project, and in the deterioration of the socio-cultural balance in the city, which in turn can lead to a sense of identity loss for the city and result in violence, a lack of trust and deterioration of social capital within the city. When an urban renewal project goes further than only reconstructing an old building and aims at positing a historic city as a global hub, the changes will be even more drastic, and thus so too will be the challenges.

Urban renewal projects are sometimes halted due to such oppositions and concerns regarding their consequences. The final outcome of the project thus becomes an over-cost and over- time endeavor. In such cases, the project doesn’t finish on time and is completed at below-acceptable quality, which further burdens the city, city governors and citizens with significant economic, social political and environmental costs.

The 11-day Istanbul training module focused on governance through urban transitions and how governance can deal with socio-cultural challenges.

Why Istanbul?

Istanbul is a city with more than 1600 years of urban history, over which culture, tradition and religion have become deeply embedded in the city’s DNA.. This is why in 2010 Istanbul was elected the European Capital of Culture. Contrastingly, because its ambitious visions to make Istanbul a world-class city with skyscrapers, world-class airports, iconic bridges, complex transportation networks (ferries, bus, metro, taxi, and trams), highways and parks, the city also exemplifies a more modern Turkey.

Istanbul has gone through a process of urban renewal that is still evolving at a rapid pace. Due to its rich history, renewal projects have always faced sociocultural opposition and conflict (Gezi Park project is a recent example). Hence, Istanbul is the ideal location to learn about challenges associated with urban renewal and infrastructure modernization, and to also explore how innovative governance solutions could help cities overcome these challenging obstacles.

Covered topics

During the 11-day Istanbul Training Module, experts from the UN-Habitat, EPFL, Bahcesehir University, Istanbul University, Yildiz Technical University, UITP, BCG, Schneider Electric, Soyok construction company, IETT, Istanbul Metropolitan Planning Institute, and the deputy mayors of four municipalities in Istanbul, as well as well-known practitioners who have been previously involved in developing efficient governance strategies in Turkey were all present.

Through this module, these diverse, experienced professionals gathered to discuss issues related to the governance of urban renewal projects, the modernization of urban infrastructures (i.e. transportation, greens, and construction), and urban resilience. More precisely, the following topics were covered during the Istanbul module:

Governance of Socio-cultural conflicts in urban renewal projects

Protection of cultural assets and social capital in the modernization process

Risk management in urban renewal projects

Financing and governance of public transportation projects in megacities

Governance of green infrastructures and urban ecosystems

Operation and maintenance of large public transport systems and use of ITCs in these systems

Theory of Governance from a technocratic point of view

Smart energy systems

Metropolitan governance evolution in Turkey

Participants in the workshops benefited from both theoretical input and practice-oriented insights to assist them in resolving the challenges facing governance throughout the complex process of urban renewal. For more information, please send an email to iglus@epfl.ch.

In the future, an increasing number of people are expected to migrate towards urban centers, which raises an important concern: where will this growing urban population be absorbed? Will they settle in existing mega cities, in new cities, or in ever-expanding medium-sized urban centers?

Statistical projections indicate that the majority of this new urbanized population will be hosted in existing small- to medium- sized cities, begging the questions: how can innovative governance serve to achieve ‘sustainable’ growth, and more specifically, what are the implications of rapid urban growth for the governance of urban infrastructures?

Urban population growth will inevitably increase demand for basic urban services such as housing, mobility, energy, clean water, waste treatment, and green areas. Increasing the efficiency and/or capacity of existing infrastructures through infrastructural development could satisfy this demand. Another significant governance challenge is presented when the temporal element is considered, namely shifting demands for basic urban services.

In medium-sized cities, migration is a major factor in population in growth. In contrast to normal population growth, which exhibits continuous and modest mortality and birth rates (a maximum of 5% per year), the increase in population size due to migration occurs at a very fast, and usually discontinuous pace. An important implication of which is that the demand for basic urban services can shift in irregular patterns over very short periods. On the other hand, new infrastructural development is usually very cost and time intensive, and once built, structures have long life cycles.

As such, cities often find themselves needing to urgently provide more (or, in rare cases, less) services for their growing populations. In order to accomplish this, they need to fill their infrastructure gaps quickly. However, time and budget place major constraints on their abilities to develop sufficient infrastructures to satisfy new demands. When facing such a challenging situation, how should cities modify infrastructural development to include a long-term planning perspective in order to ensure the ‘sustainability’ of the entire system? How can cities avoid becoming involved in firefighting to provide temporary remedies for increasing demands instead of thinking about the sustainable development of the city’s infrastructure? What roles can technology and innovation play in tackling such challenges?

The two-week IGLUS Training Module in Sharjah-Dubai was held February 2015 in order to tackle these challenging questions. This was one of seven events in the IGLUS Global Training Series, and was organized by EPFL, Switzerland in collaboration with American University of Sharjah.

The aim of this two-week training program was to understand how cities can deal with the sustainability challenges they face with a special focus on the implications for governance of large urban infrastructures.

Why Sharjah-Dubai?

Over the last 20 years, Dubai has experienced one of the highest rates of population growth in the world. The population of the Dubai metropolitan area (including Sharjah) has risen from 700,000 to 3,500,000 people over the past two decades, and the city has developed a very aggressive growth strategy for the coming years. Along with this rapid population growth, the city-emirate of Dubai and the neighboring Sharjah have also demonstrated impressive development in terms of the construction of buildings and other infrastructures such as metro lines, highways, and water desalination stations.

The city’s achievements over the past two decades are impressive and undeniable, but some critics have questioned the sustainability of this rapid growth.

For this IGLUS Global Training series, experts from around the world gathered at the American University of Sharjah during this two-week training event in Sharjah and Dubai. We chose Dubai and Sharjah for this module because these are among the best cases to illustrate how the demand for more infrastructures can be addressed and what the implications of rapid population growth for sustainability are.

In the IGLUS-Dubai event, we discussed the growth experience of Dubai and Sharjah, as well as the link between the governance of urban infrastructures and the sustainability challenges encountered throughout this rapid growth. Numerous interesting initiatives to develop and implement sustainability frameworks in other cities in the region were also discussed.

Covered topics

Experts from EPFL, American University of Sharjah, Masdar Institute of Technology, UN-Habitat, World Bank, Veolia, DEWA, BCG, ARUP and several officials from different governmental bodies were present at the Sharjah – Dubai Module, where they discussed governance in periods of rapid growth and the challenges associated with ensuring sustainable development practices. More specifically, the following topics were covered in the IGLUS-Dubai module:

System thinking for urban managers

Sustainability frameworks in the Middle East

Water governance and green infrastructure

Technological innovations in the energy sector (Masdar City Project)

Waste management

Housing market and land use planning

Planning support systems

Urban branding and tourism

Public–private partnerships

Urban resilience profiling and assessment tools

Participants in the IGLUS-Dubai module benefited from theoretical input as well as practice-oriented insights in order to assist them in resolving the challenges related to the governance of sustainable development in periods of rapid growth. Please click here to download the brochure and overall program of the Sharjah-Dubai 2015 training module. Our next IGLUS module in the Middle East will be held in Dubai in February 2016. For more information, please email iglus@epfl.ch.

It would be quite difficult to sum up all the characteristics of 21st century cities with only one word, however; we believe “complexity” would be the best candidate to fulfill this task. Urban areas, traversed by a plethora of physical and immaterial flows, are continually increasing in complexity; a pattern that is further intensified by the megatrends shaping our century, such as urbanization, densification and, urban sprawl.

To facilitate the diffusion of these flows, cities are structured by urban networks (e.g. transportation, telecommunications, water and waste, energy) that produce huge quantities of data every second: the frequency of buses on a BRT system, the energy consumption of the streetlights over a given time period, or the amount of waste collected every hour by garbage trucks. In order to cope with this complexity that is defining urban areas, accessing and processing the data produced by the city infrastructure can be a good way to monitor things, maintain awareness of what needs to be tackled, and optimize the systems in order to improve living conditions in a city.

This is about making city components smarter so that they can acquire data, act on their own, and ultimately make the city smarter. For example, road sensors can measure pollution particle concentrations in the atmosphere, communicate with intelligent road gates that will directly adapt their toll fare in order to decrease the number of cars on the road and in doing so, improve air quality. In summary, making cities smarter seems to be an effective way to deal with most of the complexity encountered in urban systems, and to facilitate the transition towards greater efficiency and performance.

The necessary technology is already here: we know how to measure atmospheric pollution, and which automated algorithms to adopt in order to make driverless subways run. The problem remains in the implementation of such technologies and on the institutional changes needed to develop smarter solutions for smarter cities.

The two-week IGLUS Training Module in Seoul was held

June 2015 to tackle these challenging questions. This event was one of the seven IGLUS modules from the first edition of the program, and was organized by EPFL, Switzerland, in collaboration with Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul. The aim of this two-week training program was to understand the governance changes that cities must undergo in order to implement technological innovations and create smarter systems.

Why Seoul?

With one of the highest rates of smart phone penetration in the world and world-class, cutting-edge ICT firms, Seoul has upheld its top ranking in the United Nations e-government survey since 2003. It has also launched a Smart Seoul program, which aims to make the Korean capital one of the smartest cities in the world.

With a wide array of projects already implemented, Seoul was the perfect candidate to gain a good insight into what can be done to make our cities smarter, and which institutional changes are needed to enhance technological innovations in an urban context.

Presenters of the Seoul Module

Experts from the Seoul Metropolitan Govermnent, Transdev, Samsung, UN-Habitat, EPFL, and Sungkyunkwan University, as well as by Korean experts from the Seoul Institute have discussed the governance of urban infrastructure systems that is required to develop and implement these beneficial technological innovations and to face the associated challenges.

Topics covered in Seoul Module

Mega urban project management (through case studies of the World Cup and Olympics that the city hosted over the last decades)

Participants in this module had also the opportunity to visit the Seoul Transportation operation center (TOPIS), Mapo Recovery Facility, Line9 Operation center and the Digital Media City (a smart city demonstrator neighborhood, developed by Seoul Metropolitan Government)

Participants in the IGLUS-Seoul Module benefited from theoretical input as well as practice-oriented insights to resolve the challenges related to governance for sustainable development in periods of rapid growth. Our next IGLUS module in Asia will be held in Seoul in June 2016.